Author Topic: Revised Fuller Warren Bridge Plans To Be Released Today  (Read 45138 times)

Metro Jacksonville

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2644
    • MetroJacksonville.com
Revised Fuller Warren Bridge Plans To Be Released Today
« on: August 06, 2014, 03:00:02 AM »
Revised Fuller Warren Bridge Plans To Be Released Today



In December 2013, Metro Jacksonville was the first to publicly raise questions about the Florida Department of Transportation's (FDOT) plans to widen the Fuller Warren Bridge without including provisions for a pedestrian/cycling crossing between Riverside and San Marco. Well, the extra eye of scrutiny worked and Jacksonville will be a better place for it. Today, City Councilman Robin Lumb unveils revised plans for Fuller Warren Bridge & I-95/I-10 interchange.

Read More: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2014-aug-revised-fuller-warren-bridge-plans-to-be-released-today

DavidFletcher

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
Re: Revised Fuller Warren Bridge Plans To Be Released Today
« Reply #1 on: August 06, 2014, 06:28:22 AM »
Is there anyone who will be providing a webcast of this press conference?

Dog Walker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3937
Re: Revised Fuller Warren Bridge Plans To Be Released Today
« Reply #2 on: August 06, 2014, 11:48:10 AM »
Councilman Lumb has done a lot of heavy lifting and has taken input from a lot of people to get FDOT to change their plans.  The project is still a boondoggle, but now includes some positive aspects and eliminates a lot of the negative that resulted from the interchange that was finished a few years ago.

We all owe him a big vote of thanks for his hard work.

The best plan would still be to improve the East Beltway, turn it into I-95 and re-designate the bridge and in-town expressway as I-295; route all the thru traffic around downtown.  Other cities have done this successfully.
When all else fails hug the dog.

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31610
    • Modern Cities
Re: Revised Fuller Warren Bridge Plans To Be Released Today
« Reply #3 on: August 06, 2014, 11:53:13 AM »
I doubt it but the plans are up at www.10and95.com. Features include a $20 million multi use path on the south side of the Fuller Warren between Riverside Ave and Palm Ave, 14' noise walls between McDuff and College, $200k to redo College Street, and removal of the ponds under the bridge. The old flyover is gone too. They are going to widen the existing flyover to 3 lanes instead.
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

cline

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1205
Re: Revised Fuller Warren Bridge Plans To Be Released Today
« Reply #4 on: August 06, 2014, 12:39:29 PM »
This plan is head and shoulders better than the original - which was completely unacceptable.  I like that the I-10 EB to I-95 SB ramp is now changing from 1 lane to 2 lanes.  That should have never been 1 lane to begin with.  Project traffic was clearly botched on that original design.  I also like the reconfigured merge were between College and Park.  I still think that way too much is going into I-10 WB.  While that movement does back up in the PM peak I don't think it is on the same level as the I-10 EB to I-95 SB backup in the AM peak.  The shared use path is the bees knees though.  Really glad that's been added.  I know it wouldn't be popular I really think that the Stockton on-ramp should have been closed in the original project and should still be closed- it creates a crazy weave which adds to the back up.  Just my .02.

Josh

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 487
Re: Revised Fuller Warren Bridge Plans To Be Released Today
« Reply #5 on: August 06, 2014, 01:40:01 PM »
This plan is head and shoulders better than the original - which was completely unacceptable.  I like that the I-10 EB to I-95 SB ramp is now changing from 1 lane to 2 lanes.  That should have never been 1 lane to begin with.  Project traffic was clearly botched on that original design.  I also like the reconfigured merge were between College and Park.  I still think that way too much is going into I-10 WB.  While that movement does back up in the PM peak I don't think it is on the same level as the I-10 EB to I-95 SB backup in the AM peak.  The shared use path is the bees knees though.  Really glad that's been added.  I know it wouldn't be popular I really think that the Stockton on-ramp should have been closed in the original project and should still be closed- it creates a crazy weave which adds to the back up.  Just my .02.

Oh God, now there's going to be even more traffic on I-10 EB trying to get into the right lanes to go South on 95 instead of staying in the left (correct) lanes. I really wish they would just isolate that ramp somehow to only those getting on 10 at Stockton.

Lunican

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3945

tufsu1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11129
Re: Revised Fuller Warren Bridge Plans To Be Released Today
« Reply #7 on: August 06, 2014, 02:29:06 PM »
from what I understand, there are 3 alternatives....all are the same except in how they handle I-95 to US 17

Alt. 1A includes the US 17 flyover announced previously
Alt. 1B includes a US 17 flyunder, requiring no right of way
Alt. 2 includes a reconfiguration of existing lanes with a new ramp to Stockton St coming from I-95 south

I think FDOT prefers Alt. 2 now
« Last Edit: August 06, 2014, 02:34:03 PM by tufsu1 »

cline

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1205
Re: Revised Fuller Warren Bridge Plans To Be Released Today
« Reply #8 on: August 06, 2014, 02:30:45 PM »
This plan is head and shoulders better than the original - which was completely unacceptable.  I like that the I-10 EB to I-95 SB ramp is now changing from 1 lane to 2 lanes.  That should have never been 1 lane to begin with.  Project traffic was clearly botched on that original design.  I also like the reconfigured merge were between College and Park.  I still think that way too much is going into I-10 WB.  While that movement does back up in the PM peak I don't think it is on the same level as the I-10 EB to I-95 SB backup in the AM peak.  The shared use path is the bees knees though.  Really glad that's been added.  I know it wouldn't be popular I really think that the Stockton on-ramp should have been closed in the original project and should still be closed- it creates a crazy weave which adds to the back up.  Just my .02.

Oh God, now there's going to be even more traffic on I-10 EB trying to get into the right lanes to go South on 95 instead of staying in the left (correct) lanes. I really wish they would just isolate that ramp somehow to only those getting on 10 at Stockton.

I think the major mistake in that idea was that traffic utilizing that ramp was severely underestimated.  I think the designers probably thought that ramp would be rarely used and the majority of traffic would utilize the other I-95 SB ramps.  However the opposite occurred.  Reason being is that there is a huge amount of traffic coming off of the Roosevelt ramp onto I-10.  In the AM peak it is nearly impossible to merge across the necessary lanes to utilize the other ramps within that short distance so the majority of those people coming off Roosevelt stay in the right lanes and take the single lane ramp.  Add that to those merging on at the Stockton ramp, the woefully inadequate signage, and those people who don't pay attention and then realize they are not in the correct lane until the last minute to go south and you have cluster that we have now.  Ta-da.

I still cannot believe that original design was deemed acceptable when it doesn't take an engineer to tell you that you are going to have tons and tons of traffic coming off of Roosevelt.  It is a major artery serving numerous highly dense neighborhoods.  The problems we have now are the logical result of this design.


thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31610
    • Modern Cities
Re: Revised Fuller Warren Bridge Plans To Be Released Today
« Reply #9 on: August 06, 2014, 02:34:23 PM »
from what I understand, Alt. 1A includes the US 17 flyover, Alt. 1B includes a US 17 flyunder, and Alt. 2 includes a reconfiguration if existing lanes....I think FDOT prefers Alt. 2 now

Yes, just got back from spending most of the day at the TPO. FDOT is recommending Alt. 2.
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

cline

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1205
Re: Revised Fuller Warren Bridge Plans To Be Released Today
« Reply #10 on: August 06, 2014, 02:39:32 PM »
from what I understand, Alt. 1A includes the US 17 flyover, Alt. 1B includes a US 17 flyunder, and Alt. 2 includes a reconfiguration if existing lanes....I think FDOT prefers Alt. 2 now

Yes, just got back from spending most of the day at the TPO. FDOT is recommending Alt. 2.

I would hope so since their own website states it is the Preferred alternative.

Josh

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 487
Re: Revised Fuller Warren Bridge Plans To Be Released Today
« Reply #11 on: August 06, 2014, 02:45:13 PM »
This plan is head and shoulders better than the original - which was completely unacceptable.  I like that the I-10 EB to I-95 SB ramp is now changing from 1 lane to 2 lanes.  That should have never been 1 lane to begin with.  Project traffic was clearly botched on that original design.  I also like the reconfigured merge were between College and Park.  I still think that way too much is going into I-10 WB.  While that movement does back up in the PM peak I don't think it is on the same level as the I-10 EB to I-95 SB backup in the AM peak.  The shared use path is the bees knees though.  Really glad that's been added.  I know it wouldn't be popular I really think that the Stockton on-ramp should have been closed in the original project and should still be closed- it creates a crazy weave which adds to the back up.  Just my .02.

Oh God, now there's going to be even more traffic on I-10 EB trying to get into the right lanes to go South on 95 instead of staying in the left (correct) lanes. I really wish they would just isolate that ramp somehow to only those getting on 10 at Stockton.

I think the major mistake in that idea was that traffic utilizing that ramp was severely underestimated.  I think the designers probably thought that ramp would be rarely used and the majority of traffic would utilize the other I-95 SB ramps.  However the opposite occurred.  Reason being is that there is a huge amount of traffic coming off of the Roosevelt ramp onto I-10.  In the AM peak it is nearly impossible to merge across the necessary lanes to utilize the other ramps within that short distance so the majority of those people coming off Roosevelt stay in the right lanes and take the single lane ramp.  Add that to those merging on at the Stockton ramp, the woefully inadequate signage, and those people who don't pay attention and then realize they are not in the correct lane until the last minute to go south and you have cluster that we have now.  Ta-da.

I still cannot believe that original design was deemed acceptable when it doesn't take an engineer to tell you that you are going to have tons and tons of traffic coming off of Roosevelt.  It is a major artery serving numerous highly dense neighborhoods.  The problems we have now are the logical result of this design.

Adding to the issues you mentioned, there are also a ton of drivers heading East (prior to Roosevelt dumping onto I-10) that move into the right-most lanes at either the first sign of a backup on the left lanes heading to I-95 South, or because they think it's somehow faster all other factors being equal. They end up causing a lot of the traffic from Roosevelt to get stuck in the rightmost lanes before they can merge left.

I would really like to see how traffic would flow for a week if traffic on that ramp was limited to just those getting on at Stockton. FWIW, it looks like the FDOT is going to double-stripe I-10E to separate 95 North and South like they should. I would prefer something with a little more texture/feedback than paint.......

cline

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1205
Re: Revised Fuller Warren Bridge Plans To Be Released Today
« Reply #12 on: August 06, 2014, 02:54:06 PM »
Quote
Adding to the issues you mentioned, there are also a ton of drivers heading East (prior to Roosevelt dumping onto I-10) that move into the right-most lanes at either the first sign of a backup on the left lanes heading to I-95 South, or because they think it's somehow faster all other factors being equal. They end up causing a lot of the traffic from Roosevelt to get stuck in the rightmost lanes before they can merge left.

I agree.  If you're traveling on I-10 (not coming from Roosevelt) there's no reason why you should try and use that ramp- unless you want to make your life harder than it needs to be.  I do think improved signage could help that.  I also don't know what they haven't painted the interstate shields on the pavement showing drivers where the lane they are in will take them- they did that on 95 WB on the overland bridge.

Quote
I would really like to see how traffic would flow for a week if traffic on that ramp was limited to just those getting on at Stockton. FWIW, it looks like the FDOT is going to double-stripe I-10E to separate 95 North and South like they should. I would prefer something with a little more texture/feedback than paint.......

It would be a cluster of epic proportions if this happened.  During the AM peak that would force drivers coming off Roosevelt to merge across 2-3 lanes in heavy congestion in a short distance to access those ramps.

Dog Walker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3937
Re: Revised Fuller Warren Bridge Plans To Be Released Today
« Reply #13 on: August 06, 2014, 03:08:02 PM »
From inside the TPO:

It seems there is a reason the FDOT has been so agreeable to makeing changes in their plan.  Councilman Bishop, who is Duval's representative on the TPO and its chair, flatly told the FDOT secretary that he would block TPO approval of the project which would have killed it completely.  The law requires TPO approval of this sort of project.
When all else fails hug the dog.

tufsu1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11129
Re: Revised Fuller Warren Bridge Plans To Be Released Today
« Reply #14 on: August 06, 2014, 07:10:37 PM »
Pretty much every FDOT project in the Jacksonville area requires TPO approval.

Also, Bishop is one of Duval County's representatives on the board...there are 4.  And I believe he is a past-chair...but he does chair the Regional Transportation Commission.
« Last Edit: August 06, 2014, 07:13:09 PM by tufsu1 »